Showing posts with label Creative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Creative. Show all posts

Monday, July 26, 2010

Tomorrow's Buzzword: Media Design


Faithful followers know I have a soft spot for buzzwords. While some people loathe them for their overuse and inability to really say anything, I heart them for their ability to give us a common language and describe (even if generically) emerging concepts.

One phrase that hasn't gotten much attention to date is "Media Design." Why? Well, quite simply it hasn't been really introduced. One man is out to change that, though.

Saneel Radia (not pictured above), formerly of Improv Olympic Chicago fame, is the recently appointed Director of Media Innovation at BBH Labs. His role there? Essentially, bringing the idea of "Media Design" to fruition after incubating it for the past few years at Denuo.

So what is Media Design? I have to admit, it took me a while to grasp the concept. Not because it's invalid or unimportant, but because it's a true paradigm-shifter. Yikes, there I go with the buzzwords again!

As Saneel puts it, Media Design represents "the missing skills within the advertising agency creative departments." In fact, that's the subtitle of Saneel's thesis completed in July of '09 for his MBA in Creative Leadership at the Berlin School.

The 70+ page paper -- which Saneel was kind enough to share with me -- makes the case (successfully, I might add) for the importance of Media Design as a discipline and the Media Designer as a critical role within creative shops.

With Saneel's permission, I'm posting the excerpts from his thesis that most resonated with me. As you read these, you can see how Saneel's thoughtfulness and ability to produce punchy soundbytes may have been shaped by his mentor and Denuo founder, Rishad Tobaccowala.

---

On the connectedness of today's consumers:

"When the world was dominated by a traditional media model, advertisers had two major advantages when engaging consumers. First, the vast majority of media consumption occurred from a single source: the content creator. In other words, as television networks broadcasted content, most people who consumed this content were receiving the broadcast, rather than receiving it from a third party. Thus, brand messages needed only to be placed within content moving linearly from a single origin to engage the vast majority of users. In fact, the relationship between the content itself and the ad message placed within it was a secondary or tertiary consideration, with the primary concern being what demographic audience was consuming the content. Of course, a relationship has always existed; audiences tend to follow loose patterns (e.g., sports content is consumed primarily by male viewers), but the content itself rarely prevented brand message insertion."

On the social media model:

"First, it means brands are actually competing for attention with the very consumers they are attempting to engage. Second, in a new media model, consumers are clearly in control. They create the content, decide who and what they connect with, and generally outline the rules of those engagements."

"If a brand’s message or experience isn’t easily portable, doesn’t provide any natural reason for consumers to share it amongst themselves, or doesn’t live organically within the new social media model, the brand is drastically handicapping its messaging potential."

On the need for non-standard creative ideation:

"The experience can simply not be standardized as it was in traditional media. Thus, it does not exist in most ad agencies because they are built to deliver creative ideas in standardized environments."

On the need for new media creative ideas to evolve:

"When crafting creative ideas limited to traditional environments, agencies rarely had to think about the experience as anything other than a message; it was up to the client to provide service and responses, in many cases, not even the same individual responsible for marketing."

On the misprioritization of technology:

"The issue though is that technologies are downstream in the creative process and primarily impact how an idea manifests or how users experience it; they rarely determine if the creative idea itself is an effective platform to engage a brand’s target consumers."

Quoting Hashem Bawja, former New Media Director at Goodby Silverstein:

"Regardless of how the engagement has changed, the best creative ideas are still the ones built from a true and compelling insight into people's lives."

On why creative agencies employ antiquated models:

"The answer can of course be found by following the profits. As traditional creative departments have become less profitable over the last fifteen years, they’ve relied more and more heavily on marking up production to drive profits. As the FTE model has continued to yield lower blended hourly retainer rates while agency compensation for employees has increased, the profit margin has eroded significantly. In other words, clients are spending a smaller percentage of budgets on retaining Creatives in relation to their investment in media and digital production. As stated above, digital creative departments integrate production into their process; this has allowed agencies to establish profit by producing executions in house."

"Any client that listens to an agency attempt to sell a creative idea that requires in-house production at the agency should immediately consider the validity of the recommendation. Is the agency truly attempting to help drive the brand’s business forward, or is it attempting to drive its own?"

On the shift from branded micro-sites to social media:

"The reason is clear: consumers are spending more time in these environments and they tend to be in exploratory mindsets as they surf profiles and updates. It’s much easier to engage a consumer looking for something to do than one in the middle of an objective that must be lured to a micro-site via a banner ad."

On understanding the Media Design concept:

"First, a new frame of reference is needed about the output of creative departments, specifically differentiating ideas vs. their executions. Next, the lines around what constitutes advertising must be redrawn and blurred to some degree as the traditional lines between product, advertising and experience are simply not clear within most new media."

On the role of creative agencies:

"Creative departments are in the ideas business."

"Today’s creative ideas must be broader, more flexible, more modular, utilitarian, and more diverse."

On the role of the Media Designer:

"Philosophically, Media Designers do not approach media as containers for the placement of uniform executions of ideas, as was highly efficient in a traditional media model. Instead, Media Designers view media as a canvas upon which are ideas are placed. More accurately, media is a collection of unique canvases, each of which has a dramatic and distinct impact on the creative manifestation itself."

"The Media Designer's primary tool is 'media' itself, of all types and formats... 'Media' is defined as any environment, virtual or physical, in which consumers may engage brands."

"Media Designers understand channel impact on content."

"Media Designers leverage media as a consumer lens... One key skill set of the Media Designer is the ability to use media as an input as adeptly as he or she uses it as an output."

"Media Designers craft media-scalable ideas. One clear distinction when approaching media as a canvas vs. as a container is understanding the striations of users across a medium and engaging them differently to maximize a creative idea’s potential. For example, YouTube receives about 89 million unique users a month [as of May 2009]. A 'container' philosophy sees this as the total possible universe reachable via advertising on YouTube. However, the audience itself can be cut an infinite number of ways, many of which will yield different outcomes based on variations on the same creative idea."

On Burger King's Whopper Sacrifice Facebook App:

"The creative idea's relationship with its medium was circular."

On why Media Design is such a foreign concept to creative shops:

"The issue currently though is that not enough relevant skills exist in most creative departments to ensure relevant conception, primarily because of the void resulting from an absence in media sensibility."

On why the industry is ripe for Media Design:

"The model is appropriate for agencies now that brand engagement has been so dramatically impacted by the new media revolution. It weaves media into the fabric of the original idea, the key reason most work is rejected by consumers today."

On managing expectations:

"Media Design is not intended as a panacea for any agency, but it certainly provides a tangible and achievable set of expertise that must be secured, then deployed as appropriate in the environment of that particular agency. In order to be successful, most agencies will require some form of reinvention. Media Design is proposed as a key step in that reinvention process for the majority of agencies around the globe."

---

Can you imagine Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce employing Media Designers? Me neither. That's one of the many reasons why SCDP would not be flourishing in today's ad world. (I'd imagine health care and HR costs would be among the others).

Media Design is both revolutionary and evolutionary. It's an approach built to manage the complexities of today's digital world while paying homage to the tried and true principles of successful advertising that have proven to work over the years across shifts in media, technology, and culture.

It will be very interesting to see how long it takes for the Media Design concept to catch on in creative agencies. I do believe it's a matter of "when" not "if" though. And, "if" it doesn't happen at Bartle Bogle Hegarty, look for Radia Goldman coming soon to a mad ave near you.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Will People Dig Digg Ads Beyond Digg?

I'm a huge fan of Digg ads... on Digg.

Per the Digg corporate blog, "Digg Ads will give you more control over which advertisements are displayed on Digg. The more an ad is Dugg, the less the advertiser will have to pay. Conversely the more an ad is buried, the more the advertiser is charged, pricing it out of the system."

Seems like a great model, right? And perfectly aligned with the Digg ecosystem.

Here's one that's live now on the Digg homepage...

Digg Ads - Ford

Today came word that Digg is thinking about running its new ad unit on 3rd-party sites. Brian Morrissey at AdWeek has good coverage of Digg's plans, comparing it to an ad network of sorts.

In the article, Chas Edwards, CRO at Digg, justifies the move as follows -- "Advertisers want the ability to take an advertising format and scale it in many places. It's like what Google started with AdWords."

Yes, but is that what consumers want? Not so sure.

Digg users want Digg ads. Or, more appropriately, Digg users will tolerate Digg ads.

But if I'm not a heavy Digger or if I'm one of the overwhelming majority of people online that's never heard of Digg and I'm not on Digg at the time, will I want or even know what to do with Digg ads?

As I said earlier, Digg adds are perfectly aligned with the Digg ecosystem. The challenge is that the Digg ecosystem does not currently extend beyond Digg.com.

I'm all for taking lessons we can learn from Google and using them to innovate in the marketing world but I think there's been a misinterpretation here.

What Google started with AdWords was a way to serve relevant ads based on queries and content.

What Google started with AdWords was a way for advertisers to reach consumers when they are in a commercial mindset -- ie, where can I buy X or what's the best brand of Y product?

I could go on but instead I'll point you to LearnFromGoogle.com for all 20 lessons.

To be sure, Digg can check some of these boxes -- eg, Tap the Wisdom of the Crowds, Act Like Content, and Let the Data Decide. But it misfires widely on Relevancy Rules, Mindset Matters, and Be Where Your Audience Is.

The bottom line is that the Google ecosystem extends far beyond Google.com because search is ubiquitous. Therefore AdWords has legs far beyond Google.com.

Until Digging content becomes ubiquitous (ie, when Digg is recognized by Webster's as a verb the way Google is) , I don't think Digg ads will be dug beyond Digg. Ya dig?

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Thoughts on Adobe Buying Omniture

OK, here are the relevant links:

Omniture Press Release

Adobe Press Release

And I'll let my tweets speak for themselves...

Adobe acquires Omniture






Adobe Omniture












Omniture Adobe












Adobe buys Omniture











Omniture Adobe Acquisition











Update 9/16:

Adobe Omniture Synergy

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Vintage Rishad

Rishad Tobaccowala is a tough act to follow. The man generates more sound bytes per second than Bill Maher touring the Vatican. Or Al Gore at a Hummer plant. Or Rush Limbaugh at the gay pride parade. OK, you get the point.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of moderating the ad:tech Chicago keynote panel immediately following Rishad's keynote conversation with Drew Ianni. As you can imagine, the crowd was plenty warmed up.

Unfortunately, I missed the last 20 minutes of his session while they got my panel situated and mic'ed up backstage but I was still able to fill 4 pages of notes with classic Rishad quips. Below are the ones I caught. To sample the entire vintage, run a search on Twitter for "#adtechchi + rishad."


  • You can't get good word-of-mouth without good products
  • Before social media, there was no amplifier for WOM
  • When clients ask for a Facebook strategy, inquire why they never asked for an NBC strategy
  • The future doesn't fit in the containers of the past
  • Marketers spend 50% of their time demanding resources for what they spend 10% of their budgets on
  • The future will be about marketing, not advertising
  • Marketing is understanding and meeting customer requirements
  • 4 things that build brands are performance, desire, culture, and intrigue -- only 1 of which has anything to do with math/data
  • Most important thing with earned media is to de-fang detractors
  • TV works
  • If you are going to build digital without TV, you have no imagination
  • Working media will decline from 85-90% of budgets to 65%
  • The world may be digital but people are analog. Analog = feelings.
  • Ideas scale much faster than math
  • Creative and media must be at the same table but don't need to work for the same company
  • Clients want best-of-breed (resources) with minimum drama. The only way to ensure zero drama is to hire 1 agency and get a pool of mediocrity.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Beware the Undertow: Don't Get Swept Away by the Forrester Wave Reports

Beware the Undertow














Image Source

Last week, Forrester released its Wave report evaluating US digital marketing agencies on strategy and execution. Brian Morrissey has a good summary in AdWeek if you don't want to pay the $1749.

I wasn't able to find the full contents of the report for free online but I did find a complete copy of the Q2 '09 Forrester Wave rating the web design chops of digital marketing agencies. After dissecting it a bit, I have some questions about the methodology and overall usefulness of these reports.

The Envelope Please

Per Forrester, the top agencies for "transaction-led web projects" (read: ecommerce) are Sapient, Razorfish (who just got acquired by Publicis resolving Microsoft's conflict of interest but not Razorfish's -- see my update to this post), imc2, IconNicholson (yeah, I don't know either), and IBM Interactive.

As for "image-led web projects" (read: branding), the top shops were Sapient, Razorfish, IBM Interactive, imc2, and Organic.

Checking Boxes

Forrester used the following 18 criteria to score agencies:


  1. User research
  2. Persona creation
  3. Persona application
  4. Design process
  5. Skills and staffing
  6. Cross-office consistency
  7. Measurement
  8. Collaboration abilities
  9. User experience
  10. Brand image experience
  11. Satisfaction of reference clients
  12. Market positioning
  13. Clarity of vision
  14. Emerging web technologies
  15. Industry focus
  16. Billable staff as of Q4 2008
  17. Revenues (2008)
  18. Revenue growth (2008 over 2009)
  19. Number of North American offices
From there, Forrester used 25 (undisclosed) criteria to score 2 websites and 1 persona submitted by each agency.

The rest of the report was completed based on interviews with agency staffers and 2 client references offered by each shop.

Better than Nothing

While I applaud any and all efforts to bring sense to the nonsense that is the agency/client RFP process, I think the Forrester report is incomplete, at best, and flawed, at worst.

For one thing, the process for selecting which agencies it includes in the report is questionable. Per footnote #6, Forrester "invited 29 shops from Advertising Age's top 50 digital agencies by web design revenue to participate" along with 2 from a previous report, before picking "the 20 largest."

So, right off the bat Forrester assumes that the best agencies are the ones with the most revenue. (Unfortunately, many clients make this mistake too when building their list of shops to RFP, but more on that later.)

Even after settling on 20 shops, it's quite telling that 2 dropped out of the Forrester study because they "had commitments that prevented them from dedicating the required time and resources."

Indeed, it takes time and resources to contribute to, I mean... manipulate the results of this report. First, you have to pick your best 2 websites and 1 persona that you worked on in the past year -- clearly, not representative of your entire body of work, just cherry-pick the top outputs. Then you have to offer up 2 client references -- obviously, focusing on those that are best buds, relatives or otherwise inclined to only say glowing things about you. Finally, you have to take your best people off their current projects to make time for Forrester's intensive interviews.

Geez, this Forrester Wave report sounds a lot like the Agency/Client RFP process itself, aye?

Losing the Forrest for the Trees

Don't get me wrong, I think the Forrester Wave reports are valuable resources for clients trying to decide between the shops evaluated. My issue is that not all the shops are evaluated. And, furthermore, the criteria is too complicated and subjective to be really meaningful.

As an aside, last year, while I was at Resolution Media, I had my team inquire as to how we could be included in the Forrester Wave Search Marketing Agency Report. Resolution Media is rated by AdAge as a top 20 agency by revenue so I thought that would be enough to make the list. Turns out, our inquiry was returned by a salesperson looking to sell us a research subscription. It was unclear whether or not this is a prerequisite for inclusion in the Wave reports but we declined and instead took them up on an offer to speak directly with one of their analysts who was responsible for compiling the report. Let's just say that we never heard from anyone but the salesperson again.

Now, I realize that doing comprehensive research on 18 criteria across the hundreds, nay, thousands of digital marketing agencies out there is simply not feasible. However, I'd argue that all the various points of differentiation (Cross-office consistency, Measurement, Collaboration abilities, User experience, etc.) can all be boiled down to one key metric/benchmark: client satisfaction.

I won't make you go back and read all 4,000+ words of my client-agency RFP manifesto but here was one of my suggestions:

"I’m a big fan of the Ultimate Question as a way to cut through all the clutter and get to the heart of how good a job a company is doing. Responses to the question, 'How likely is it that you would recommend this company to a friend or colleague?' tell us more about that company than any exhaustive questionnaire or fancy demo ever will.

We need a system whereby all agencies are required to create a 3rd-party audited list of current and former clients including duration of engagement (ie, number of years under contract) and breakdown of service offerings. Then, each quarter, a 3rd party asks all clients to anonymously rate their agencies on the Ultimate Question. The resulting list would be sortable by agency service offering and client category and be made available to the general public for a nominal fee (to cover the survey hosting costs).

This model is really nothing more than a peer rating system for agencies -- not unlike Yelp for restaurants or eBay for merchandise sellers. Just as LinkedIn is the Facebook for business, I guess I’m suggesting a review site for marketing communications agencies. I firmly believe in the power of transparent and self-policing communities."

Rest assured, folks, I'm working on it! In the meantime, please take the Forrester Wave reports (and the plethora of agency press releases they touch off) with a grain of blue ocean sea salt.

Monday, May 11, 2009

Digital 30: Just What the Web Was Missing

So today I came across this article in Mediaweek -- Web to Soon See :30s

Apparently, ShortTail Media is introducing a new online ad-unit that's a cross between a full-screen takeover and a 30 second TV commercial.

C'mon, really?!? You're telling me someone sat down and said, "Hmm, maybe if we take the 2 most annoying ad placements of all time and put them together, we'll have a great offering!"

And they certainly didn't do themselves any favors by positioning it to Mediaweek as a "a full-screen, deliberately intrusive placement."

As the story goes, "Back in February at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s annual meeting, [ShortTail Media founder David] Payne delivered a provocative speech urging the industry to adopt bigger, bolder creative and to be less sensitive to user-experience."

Less sensitive to the user-experience?!? Has Google taught us nothing? Need I remind you of the acquisition email and the pop-up?

Somehow I don't think the way to " inspire a creative revolution" is by hijacking the web and holding consumers captive.

Even though IAB Chief Randall Rothenberg and I may disagree on what makes the heart beat and the mouse click, I'm sure we can both agree that this experimental ad unit is not going to do much more than make the blood pressure rise and the mouse click 'X'.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

What Comes First -- The Heart Beat or the Mouse Click?

I just read IAB President, Randall Rothenberg's masterpiece -- "A Bigger Idea: A Manifesto on Interactive Advertising Creativity." It's a bit meaty but, as you know, I'm not averse to lengthy blog posts around particular passion points. For anyone who wants to understand the impact of the digital sea change, Rothenberg's piece is required reading.

He begins by attacking the "four enemies of online branding:

  • A direct-marketing culture and tradition that devalues creativity and its long-term effect on brands
  • An interactive agency business model that disincentivizes greatness and fails to penalize mediocrity
  • An unwillingness by mainstream agencies to integrate technologists as full partners in the advertising creative team
  • Media industry values and habits that malign and depreciate our own products, and by extension our customers'"
    • And he closes with four action items for "digital publishers and agencies:

      1. Motivate greatness among your best creative people, for their work inspires consumers and customers alike.
      2. Collaborate -- creative agencies and publishers -- with each other and within yourselves to develop outstanding advertising and communications products.
      3. Assemble writers, designers, and technologists into teams that can engage the intellect and emotions of audiences and individuals across all channels, toward the goal of creating enduring brands.
      4. Prove to your customers that causing the heart to beat quick is at least as important as making the mouse click."

      There are a number of threads in Rothenberg's post that sparked my interest and merit further discussion. For now, I'll just focus on one -- "the gap between the mouseclick and the heartbeat."

      To illustrate his point, Rothenberg poses this "admittedly trick question:

      What's the biggest difference between a traditional creative agency and a new-age digital agency?

      Answer: Traditional creative agencies are named after human beings. Digital agencies are named after inanimate objects or nonsense words."

      Indeed. Although, most of those traditional shops now carry acronyms in place of the principal's names to cater to today's short attention span masses -- DDB, BBDO, GSD&M, TBWA, Y&R, JWT, etc.

      Rothenberg's point is that the "depersonalization of the agency business" is indicative of a trend towards advertising globalization and industrialization. He posits that we need to start to "recognize and reward the creative individuals who make greatness happen" -- whether that's by naming firms after them or giving them a bigger stage at awards ceremonies like Cannes.

      I agree with Rothenberg that we are witnessing the downfall of advertising creativity as we've known it to date but I would argue that what's replaced it -- a relentless pursuit of scale, accountability, and optimization -- is much more relevant and powerful to advertisers and consumers in today's burgeoning digital media ecosystem.

      Put another way, I think these days what makes the heart beat is the mouse click. Not the other way around.

      Take for instance, the Snuggie -- which has become Resolution Media's mascot of sorts. What made this "blanket with sleeves" become a cult sensation? It sure wasn't their TV spots. Watching the folks in this commercial lie around on the couch is more likely to make your heart stop than beat. No, what got everyone excited about this product was all the mouse clicks that resulted when this brand went viral -- the commercial parody, the pub crawl, the sightings blog, etc.

      I really believe the cause and effect with Snuggie's popularity was mouse click then heart beat. People took to this brand because they were excited about all the mouse clicking that was happening and wanted to be a part of it. In a matter of days, thousands of people signed up for the pub crawl and the commercial parody has nearly 2 million views.

      So, rather than hearken for the days of old when marketers built their brand by creating masterful ads and broadcasting them out to the masses, we need to embrace the idea that what moves the needle in today's instant gratification, always-on, Type-F society is planting the seeds of a brand across various media touchpoints and sparking viral, peer-to-peer conversations.

      Indeed, the message has become the medium. And, for marketer's to thrive/survive, that message better click.

      Related Posts with Thumbnails